It seems that LOGIZOMAI is used both with passive (Rom 4.3-4) and active
meaning (1Cor 5.9). How is it possible?
______________________________

That ELOGISQH in Rom 4.3 is translated as a passive is only as would be
expected since it is, in fact, passive. I assume therefore that you are
actually referring to LOGIZETAI in 4.4. Your reference of 1 Cor 5.9 is
puzzling to me since my copy of Nestle-Aland (and I suspect yours as well)
doesn't have a form of LOGIZOMAI. I can only guess as to what passage you
might refer. If it should be 1 Cor 13.5, it likewise uses LOGIZETAI as does
Rom 4.4. The middle and passive of the deponents are the same. In the one
instance (1 Cor 13.5), we have the middle form used as an active. In the
other (Rom. 4.4) we have the passive form (which happens to be the same as
the middle).